AMD Radeon vs Nvidia GeForce PC - South African pricing

OP - I've generally liked your articles. They're a step up from what we've usually gotten regarding hardware.

This one is kinda uninspired though...those builds overspend on CPU and motherboard (and RAM but 16Gb is nice so that can slide). For the same or similar budget, a gamer could probably step up to a 1070 (or better).

That Corsair PSU :(
 
Well, then punish Intel for not making that and not taking care of your needs and buy a Ryzen for your workstation functions (else why need a 8 core so bad)...

I want to, but thus far Ryzen is not matching 7700k with legacy. I'm still on 2500K and its showing it's age - any video card > 970 CPU bottlenecks. I need to buy, but ideally I would want something exciting like Ryzen, but I need it to at least match a 6700K performance wise on older games, i.e. Arma.
 
Ok, lets be honest now, Ryzen is good, but to be honest, Intel offers options as well. Lets take the i7-6800K for Example, costs R200 less than a R7 1800x. Yes, it has two cores and threads less, but it can also be overclocked to get a performance boost, despite it already clocking to 4GHz. It uses LGA2011-V3, which is by no way lacking behind AMD with regards to features either.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what you decide, both manufacturers give well priced options capable of taking on each other. Comparing an 8 Core CPU with a 4 core CPU is silly when there are 6 core options available from Intel for R200 less than the price of the AMD 8 core CPU.
 
Ok, lets be honest now, Ryzen is good, but to be honest, Intel offers options as well. Lets take the i7-6800K for Example, costs R200 less than a R7 1800x. Yes, it has two cores and threads less, but it can also be overclocked to get a performance boost, despite it already clocking to 4GHz. It uses LGA2011-V3, which is by no way lacking behind AMD with regards to features either.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what you decide, both manufacturers give well priced options capable of taking on each other. Comparing an 8 Core CPU with a 4 core CPU is silly when there are 6 core options available from Intel for R200 less than the price of the AMD 8 core CPU.

That's why you buy a 1700 and just overclock it.
 
OP - I've generally liked your articles. They're a step up from what we've usually gotten regarding hardware.

This one is kinda uninspired though...those builds overspend on CPU and motherboard (and RAM but 16Gb is nice so that can slide). For the same or similar budget, a gamer could probably step up to a 1070 (or better).

That Corsair PSU :(

Why ? There is absolutely nothing wrong with corsair, yes it's their entry level PSU, but this is a gaming rig not a overclocking rig, which would need a better preforming topology or water cooling ect.It isn't the least bit dodgy, they could have gone with coolermaster or huntkey, then you would have had reason to bemoan it. Personally I would go a tier up, but that is about double the costs.

Yes there is absolutely no reason for the beast board, board performance in general are same more or less unless you require a board for Ocing or full speed PCIe ports for SLI or crossfire, you can definitely dial it back a bit there.

Disagree on the CPU front, the better the CPU the longer you can use the rig overall.
 
^, I had one a couple years back. The 12v rail struggled under load delivering variable voltage that caused my PC to crash - this wasn't an overclocked PC either though the graphics card was fairly-power hungry by modern standards.

I thought it was bad luck and RMA'd it but google told me others were having the same issue with this particular PSU. Whether they've revised it and fixed the problem, I don't know but I wouldn't use another one except in a HTPC or something like that.
 
Last edited:
Which gamer will spend more on his CPU than GPU, and almost as much on the motherboard? For a gamer I'd say save R 2,000 by getting a Core i5-7500, save another R 2,000 getting a B250 motherboard, and spend the R 4,000 saving upping the graphics card from a GTX 1060 to a GTX 1080.
 
[XC] Oj101;19447740 said:
Which gamer will spend more on his CPU than GPU, and almost as much on the motherboard? For a gamer I'd say save R 2,000 by getting a Core i5-7500, save another R 2,000 getting a B250 motherboard, and spend the R 4,000 saving upping the graphics card from a GTX 1060 to a GTX 1080.

Almost correct, instead of the i5-7500 you get the i7-6700 from PotterH for less than the i5 :D
 
[XC] Oj101;19447740 said:
Which gamer will spend more on his CPU than GPU, and almost as much on the motherboard? For a gamer I'd say save R 2,000 by getting a Core i5-7500, save another R 2,000 getting a B250 motherboard, and spend the R 4,000 saving upping the graphics card from a GTX 1060 to a GTX 1080.


The biggest Gaming platform in the world will disagree with you on GTX 1080, top dog is the 970GTX, I have for years and years, got best CPU and board combo, with mid range GPU and later simply upgraded the GPU, you are and will always be better off getting the best CPU you can afford, you can always upgrade the GPU later in the short term, CPU's/Motherboards are the least likely thing to be upgraded in any gaming system.Long term CPU pwns GPU period, unless of course you have contrary evidence to suggest otherwise.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc
 
The biggest Gaming platform in the world will disagree with you on GTX 1080, top dog is the 970GTX, I have for years and years, got best CPU and board combo, with mid range GPU and later simply upgraded the GPU, you are and will always be better off getting the best CPU you can afford, you can always upgrade the GPU later in the short term, CPU's/Motherboards are the least likely thing to be upgraded in any gaming system.Long term CPU pwns GPU period, unless of course you have contrary evidence to suggest otherwise.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc

That's because most people can't afford a GTX 1080. With the R 17.5k budget in the article you can certainly consider a GTX 1080. You can't possibly be saying that the GTX 970 is a better card just because it's more popular.

As for the CPU front, let's rewind to the Sandy Bridge days where you could choose between the Core i5-2500K and Core i7-2600K. Fast forward back to today, six years later, and how many games are taking advantage of the Core i7? Very few.

Which of these do you think will be a better gaming rig?

1. Core i5-2400 with GTX 1080
2. Core i7-7700K with GTX 1060

You will find that even an older midrange CPU is a very capable contender for most people :)

And then please tell me what advantage(s) a R 3,400 motherboard offers a gamer over a R 1,300 board?
 
The biggest Gaming platform in the world will disagree with you on GTX 1080, top dog is the 970GTX, I have for years and years, got best CPU and board combo, with mid range GPU and later simply upgraded the GPU, you are and will always be better off getting the best CPU you can afford, you can always upgrade the GPU later in the short term, CPU's/Motherboards are the least likely thing to be upgraded in any gaming system.Long term CPU pwns GPU period, unless of course you have contrary evidence to suggest otherwise.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc

Why would anyone buy a brand-new 970 today? Poor salesman advice…

970

http://www.wootware.co.za/galax-97n...om-clancy-s-the-division-virtual-voucher.html

R6,999

vs

1070

http://www.wootware.co.za/galax-gef...gb-gddr5-pci-e-3-0-desktop-graphics-card.html

R6,299.00

or why not go 1080?

http://www.wootware.co.za/galax-80n...agon-game-ready-bundle-115-in-game-value.html

R7,499.00, only R500 more than the 'top dog' Steam analysis which takes historical trends into the account.
 
The biggest Gaming platform in the world will disagree with you on GTX 1080, top dog is the 970GTX, I have for years and years, got best CPU and board combo, with mid range GPU and later simply upgraded the GPU, you are and will always be better off getting the best CPU you can afford, you can always upgrade the GPU later in the short term, CPU's/Motherboards are the least likely thing to be upgraded in any gaming system.Long term CPU pwns GPU period, unless of course you have contrary evidence to suggest otherwise.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc

I'm really not following your logic. Just because the 970 is the most common does not equate to the best. Also if you look at that link you provided 43% of people only have dual cores while 50% have quad cores but included in this will be dual core cpus with hyperthreading ala i3 etc. The next thing to look at is the clock speed with most cpus being between 2.3-2.7GHz.

The only thing the steam stats tell you is what the average person owns but if you interpret that to mean the 970 > 1080 and you should rather buy a 970 over a 1080 to get better performance then ja i dunno what to say.
 
Why would anyone buy a brand-new 970 today? Poor salesman advice…

970

http://www.wootware.co.za/galax-97n...om-clancy-s-the-division-virtual-voucher.html

R6,999

vs

1070

http://www.wootware.co.za/galax-gef...gb-gddr5-pci-e-3-0-desktop-graphics-card.html

R6,299.00

or why not go 1080?

http://www.wootware.co.za/galax-80n...agon-game-ready-bundle-115-in-game-value.html

R7,499.00, only R500 more than the 'top dog' Steam analysis which takes historical trends into the account.

Sigh, way to take the stats and be stupid with it, at no point did I say you should buy 970GTX, only some one like you would come to that conclusion.I am pointing out people aren't gaming on 1080GTX it isn't the most popular card out there, 970GTX is still popular doesn't necessarily mean people are still buying new, but wouldn't be surprising as large US stores reduce prices to clear old stock, not every one is going to care about it.

What is clear a very small percentage of gamers are using 1080GTX's even 980GTX's majority is using mainstream cards like the 970GTX/1060/1070 ect.


What isn't evident is whether people are buying i5's or i7's but there is a steady increase on the number of cores most pc's have, while it is still only about half.

While you may not agree with the logic get best CPU you can afford even if it means skimping on the GPU it is a none issue, games are more then flexible to deal with a mid range GPU's especially that most mid range cards is more then able to handle 1080P, as the game development tools used are pretty standard, with the predominantly used engines being unity and unreal.Very few developers still develop their own in house engine especially in this rather harsh industry.

With the standardization of a select few engines being used across most games these days means the general performance from one game is generally the same more or less for another, and depends more on how much the developer spend on optimizing the level environments.Shaders are pretty much universal across games, with minor changes here and there.

While no two games will give you the same performance build on the same engine, however hardware requirements stay pretty stable across games release on a specific unity or unreal version. CPU requirements in general has picked up quite a bit, while gaming on i3 systems is still reasonable it isn't the mainstream gaming chip it used to be, and with multi threading in unity and unreal you will gain more in the longer term with a stronger CPU especially with HT. Considering I work with these engines you are better of with more cores.
 
Sigh, way to take the stats and be stupid with it, at no point did I say you should buy 970GTX, only some one like you would come to that conclusion.I am pointing out people aren't gaming on 1080GTX it isn't the most popular card out there, 970GTX is still popular doesn't necessarily mean people are still buying new, but wouldn't be surprising as large US stores reduce prices to clear old stock, not every one is going to care about it.

What is clear a very small percentage of gamers are using 1080GTX's even 980GTX's majority is using mainstream cards like the 970GTX/1060/1070 ect.

You are right, someone like me would come to that conclusion, you did say,

The biggest Gaming platform in the world will disagree with you on GTX 1080, top dog is the 970GTX.

considering that these GPU's are positioned in market segments, relegated with each new cycle. The 970 came in at $329 MSRP at launch, $70 less than the 770 it replaced, not only disrupting AMD’s pricing strategy, but also their product positioning. This ultimately allowed NVidia to claim the high-end market, still unchallenged.

Then came the 1070 which replaced the 970, but launched at an $379 MSRP. Though $50 more it preceded the 970 in its product positioning. The 1060 priced between $199-$249 MSRP, $80 less than the 970 at launch, but positioned higher, will replace the obsolete, in marketing terms, 970. This will translate directly into the Steam Hardware Survey as it is being populated over time.

As with every cycle, have we a buyer’s cycle. Updated or new architecture may be released periodically on say a yearly basis, but a buyer may only purchase every 2rd, 3th or 4th year, and new systems purchases are on a steady decrease. In gaming terms, an GPU scales better with gaming than an CPU where the CPU (and the motherboard) may set bottlenecks down the line.

But, to get back to my reasoning, seeing the article addressed two options within an ~R17,500 budget, the budget may be applied more optimally as advised by other contributors in this thread.

It is noteworthy to quote this article,

https://mybroadband.co.za/news/hard...re-still-buying-expensive-graphics-cards.html

Wootware lead developer Matthew Berry said there has been a lot of interest in the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti graphics card in South Africa, especially among gamers and hardware enthusiasts.

...

Berry said mid-to-high-range graphics cards are the most popular among South African consumers, despite the higher price of the hardware.

“Both budget and high-end markets are robust in South Africa,” said Berry.

“Mid-range and higher GPUs tend to be more popular than budget hardware, since there are more integrated GPUs and second-hand options to consider in the lower price segment,” he said.

“As people spend more time gaming, it starts to make sense to consider the higher-end of the hardware spectrum.”

The interest in high-end gaming hardware is evident in Wootware’s store, with the most popular Nvidia graphics card the GeForce GTX 1060.

The GeForce GTX 1060 is a powerful GPU, capable of running most new games in Full HD with a high frame rate, and currently sells for between R4,000-R5,500 locally.

so yes, there is interest in the high-end market, and with an ~R17,500 budget you surely have access to that user experience. Not everyone wants to be limited to 1080P, especially when you had the means to exceed the limitation. Why then spend more on the CPU than the GPU?
 
Not everyone wants to be limited to 1080P, especially when you had the means to exceed the limitation. Why then spend more on the CPU than the GPU? What I am pointing out is you don't need the best GPU right away you can get away with mid range GPU in the mean time and upgrade the GPU in 2-3 months time down the line.

People don't generally upgrade the CPU, almost never.If people do upgrade it's usually to a newer generation, in gaming terms there is a definitely a tipping point where it would more helpful to have a stronger CPU and upgrade the GPU later, especially like you said people only upgrade CPU/board maybe every second or 4th year, with majority of games being based on unity and unreal, with some exceptions of course. Single player games generally you can do fine with a i3 or an i5 online gaming is entirely different set of CPU requirements and you are far better off with a CPU with HT, who here doesn't do a fair amount of online gaming, even then constant updates to unreal and unity is definitely going push 4 cores in future.

If you however look the 1080GTX with or without the Ti considering the original 1080 was released in may last year the adoption rate has been pretty poor up to this point, whether it is price related or not, also consider that 45% of the survey used 1080p, 2016 saw 60% of users below 1080p.

In 2015 HD4000 was the top GPU, second 970GTX, 2016 970GTX, up to march 2017 970GTX.So no surprise that the 980GTX is way way down the list which suggest a single stores sales doesn't reflect what majority gamers do, no surprise that close to 3 years is the top card.What is additionally interesting is that in that 3 years of stats, high end cards don't preform that well in the charts.

What does tell you ? Even in a gaming beast you would be perfectly fine with a mid range-ish card, future proofing especially following engine blogs and such, having 8 game development engines, more cores in the long term is going to kick better ass then getting a once off high end card, of course lets not forget DX12 is still pretty niche market to say the least, there isn't much reason to move over to new tech or windows 10, DX12 titles isn't exactly flying off the development line.With a 2 to 3 year development cycle for games in general, DX12 should take a while to become mainstream, likely 4th Q should see some influx with new games.

The increase in performance from 9 series to 10 series while decent, doesn't really warrant to jump 9 series boat, after 10 will see better adoption rates then.

That is just what I think ;) Whether you agree or see it differently entirely up to you.Thanks for the insight any ways :P

https://www.gamespot.com/forums/sys...is-of-steam-hardware-survey-2016-ed-33145952/
https://mygaming.co.za/news/pc/7995...snt-suck-steams-hardware-survey-suggests.html
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X